A plebiscite, also known as a referendum, is a direct vote where the electorate in question is asked to accept or reject a government policy, piece of legislation, constitution or constitutional amendment, or the recall of an elected official. In the context of legislative inaction, public demand for a plebiscite is also known as an initiative. A plebiscite can be politically obligatory or advisory. It is a form of direct democracy, which emphasizes the importance of citizen involvement and direct political participation. In contrast, representative democracy stresses the role of elected representatives.
However, a mutually exclusive differentiation of the two forms of democracy is not accurate, since plebiscites have been included successfully in representative democracies. Within complex systems of representative democratic institutions and processes, the use of government-initiated plebiscites at the national level has continued to increase in many Western democracies. Citizen-initiated plebiscites are still much less common. This is not necessarily an indication of increased democracy through direct measure, but rather, it could be indicative of strategic decisions and motives of governments. Governments may be motivated to consolidate power, resolve internal party divisions, pass legislation that would otherwise not be passed, or secure public approval of policies so as to avoid damage to government legitimacy.
With regard to the increase in government-initiated plebiscites, there is greater demand for citizen access to political decision-making processes. This focus on increased citizen action relates to increasing resources and political skills within the given electorate. Electorates who are more “adept” can be reliably involved in complex, political decision making and democratic processes. At the same time, there is a growing level of public cynicism toward government and government officials. This trend has resulted in greater disaffection toward politics and political institutions, ultimately resulting in reduced public confidence in traditional modes of democracy. Consequently, plebiscites are used increasingly as protective mechanisms for the public. In other words, plebiscites help to ensure that citizens’ rights are secured while their opinions and demands are conveyed to their political leaders. By extension, the use of plebiscites may have increased based on faux populism, wherein various political groups and interest groups see plebiscites or referendums as new devices to “bend the use of popular political action to their own narrow purposes” (Craig, Kreppel, and Kane, 25–26).
Despite the increase in plebiscites, the outcome of these direct votes is still relatively uncertain. A few comparisons with elections are useful in this regard. For instance, the issue position of voters with regard to ballot content or its underlying political ideology is important in both plebiscites and elections, as is public trust in leaders and government. However, in plebiscites, political parties may align themselves with different sides of the debate, often in unexpected ways and ultimately complicating voter choice, especially given voters’ party identification. This can cause a greater degree of volatility and uncertainty for the outcome of plebiscites, since voters do not have the expected partisan cues that are normally present during elections.
Additionally, various campaign effects and media coverage can result in greater levels of volatility and uncertainty in plebiscites than in elections. When plebiscites deal with issues that are familiar to the public, and which fall along previously defined ideological cleavages and core beliefs in society, the outcome tends to be more certain. Where issues are unfamiliar or complex, increased volatility and uncertainty result.
Overall, plebiscites that deal with public policy issues or legislation are more likely to receive public support than those that revolve around constitutional changes or implementation. Plebiscites on constitutional issues are very different from policy plebiscites; the former deal with fundamental changes to government and institutional structures, while the latter are often relatively minor in nature. As a result, constitutional changes through plebiscites are more likely to fail than plebiscites that deal with other matters.
Bibliography:
- Craig, Stephen, Amie Kreppel, and James Kane. “Public Opinion and Support for Direct Democracy: A Grassroots Perspective.” In Referendum Democracy: Citizens, Elites, and Deliberation in Referendum Campaigns, edited by Matthew Mendelsohn and Andrew Parkin. New York: Palgrave
- Macmillan, 2001. Galligan, Brian. “Amending Constitutions through the Referendum Device.” In Referendum Democracy: Citizens, Elites, and Deliberation in Referendum Campaigns, edited by Matthew Mendelsohn and Andrew Parkin. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001.
- LeDuc, Lawrence. The Politics of Direct Democracy: Referendums in Global Perspective. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press, 2003.
- LeDuc, Lawrence, and Jon Pammett. “Referendum Voting: Attitudes and Behaviour in the 1992 Constitutional Referendum.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 28, no. 1 (1995): 3–33.
- Mendelsohn, Matthew, and Andrew Parkin. “Introducing Direct Democracy in Canada.” Choices 7, no. 5 (2001): 3–35.
- Morel, Laurence. “The Rise of Government-Initiated Referendums in Consolidated Democracies.” In Referendum Democracy: Citizens, Elites, and Deliberation in Referendum Campaigns, edited by Matthew Mendelsohn and Andrew Parkin. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001.
This example Plebiscite Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.
See also:
- How to Write a Political Science Essay
- Political Science Essay Topics
- Political Science Essay Examples